Thursday, October 13, 2011

Letter from SSPX Superior General Bishop Fellay to Bishop Williamson

Please publish on the same blog on which you published the Sept 23 letter of Bishop Fellay to me, the following message --

The September 23 letter from Bishop Fellay to me, as posted on the Maurice Pinay blog, is authentic, but it was put on the Internet without my knowledge and without my permission. I sent a copy to friends to ask their advice or to tell them why I was not present at the Albano meeting, but never did I want that copy to appear in public. I have no idea who posted it, nor do I ask who did so.

Bishop Richard Williamson, London, 14 Oct. 2011

Letter from Bishop Fellay to Bishop Williamson

23 September, 2011

Your Excellency,

I would be happy to invite you to the SSPX Superiors’ meeting to be held in Albano early in October, as the nature and composition of the meeting has been somewhat changed because of current events. I would also be happy to send you a text from Rome to which they want a reply. However, I find myself obliged to attach conditions to each of these points.

Firstly, as to the text, I ask of you an oath in writing that you will communicate to nobody either the text or its content. Too often in the past you have lacked discretion, so I am obliged to submit you to a procedure of this kind, which I am not happy to have to do.

Secondly, as to the meeting in Albano, I can only invite you to attend insofar as you stop publishing Eleison Comments. You have already been given the reason several times, as you have been given the order to stop. You considered that for the sake of the preaching and defence of the Faith you needed pay no attention, on the pretext that nobody had the right to stop a bishop from fulfilling his duty to preach and defend the Faith. But such preaching and defence of the Faith are inserted in concrete circumstances which may well call for superiors to intervene. Besides, no other bishop of the SSPX publishes a circular letter and considers himself thereby hindered from expressing himself.

Moreover the consequences of your attitude are harmful to the SSPX: you ooze distrust towards SSPX headquarters and the Superior General. You cannot help yourself communicating this feeling to those around you. No revolution could do a better job of undermining authority… and this you do in the name of a supposed possible betrayal on the part of the Superior General… That is very serious.

Especially when a certain number of indications show that your action is not confined to theory:

1 To an Argentinian priest from the Novus Ordo who asks for your advice, you recommend that he should not join the SSPX.

2 To an American layman you write that the apostasy of the mainstream Church is farther advanced than that of the SSPX. How can you write such things, false and unjust, against the Society of which you are still a member?

3 There exists in Anglo-saxon circles a network of infiltrators of the SSPX preparing a break-away. You are put forward as the head of this movement, you are the friend of its leaders and you are playing their game.

And you talk to us of being double tongued! As for the unity of the SSPX, the one most putting it in danger is yourself, your Excellency! Always in the name of defense of the Faith. In such a grave moment as the confrontation now taking place between ourselves and the Holy See, the outcome of which will be decisive for our own future and not without consequences for the entire Church, I ask you then, once more, to remain silent until further orders. If you were to refuse to heed this directive, it would mean both your not being invited to the Albano meeting and the starting of the canonical procedure leading to exclusion from the SSPX. So I await your reply.

All of this is most sad, and it has nothing to do with the confrontation just mentioned, whatever you may think. The loss of one of its bishops is one of the worst things that could happen to the SSPX. It depends entirely on you to spare it such a misfortune. Do believe, your Excellency, in my fervent prayers to the Sacred Heart of Jesus,
BpF.

I could add a few things to the list that that Bishop Fellay sent over from my correspondence with Bishop Williamson just after the eruption of his comments re: Holocaust...

Years ago, I was at one of the seminal Traditional conferences where one of the speakers noted that when Rome excommunicated Archbishop Lefebvre and the four bishops, that it actually had the effect of chopping Rome from the Tree of Life and the True Church. I'm reminded of that now, as Bishop Williamson sits "on the bubble". Will the action be a pre-cursor to a return to Rome for the SSPX in general?

I think it will be instructive to see if the unfortunate double-mindedness exhibited by Bishop Williamson in relation to the current warm body occupying (usurping) the Chair of Peter will cause him to break with or return to the SSPX.

It appears that there is more and more pressure - both from above and below (major grumblings in the SSPX ranks) with the fence-sitting posture that currently infects the SSPX. It will be interesting to see how things shake out.

I pray for the best for all parties and for the embattled Spotless Bride of Christ, won with much suffering by Our Lord.

I wish I could say otherwise, but I am not shocked in the least at this latest report.

There are many things that I could very critically comment on about this reputed letter from Bp. Fellay to Bp. Williamson, but since I cannot attest to its authenticity at this time I will refrain from doing so. Nevertheless, in my opinion the time has unfortunately finally come for me to make public a personal face to face conversation I had with the Rev. Fr. Niklaus Phluger in the mid-afternoon of Sunday, February 20, 2011.

Said conversation took place in the bookstore of the SSPX's chapel Our Lady Immaculate in Oak Park, Illinois. At the time Fr. Phluger was First Assistant to the Superior General of the SSPX, His Excellency Bp. Fellay.

I have been a regular attendee of Our Lady Immaculate for a good number of years. I am familiar to some degree with the circumstances surrounding the long internal exile which has been imposed upon Bp. Williamson by Bp. Fellay. It was in this context that I walked up to and engaged Fr. Phluger in a brief one on one exchange. We stood all alone.

I figured my time with Fr. Phluger would be rather limited so I immediately cut to the chase in inquiring about the status of Bp. Williamson. In the course of our talk, Fr. Phluger made some pointed derogatory statements about Bp. Williamson. These were topped off by his stunning assertion with respect to Bp. Williamson and this is verbatim: "He's a Nazi." As God is my witness that is exactly what this priest told me face to face.

I made the above quote known to Bp. Williamson as well as the full details of my conversation with Fr. Phluger in an email to the former one day later on February 21, 2011. I still retain that email as well as the reply I received to it from Bp. Williamson on February 22, 2011. (I also informed my SSPX pastor of the conversation and the specific Nazi assertion in an email to him on February 23rd.)

I am sorry to bring such a despicable affair to light at this time, but I think that those who are in a position to do so should hold Fr. Pfluger accountable for it. Don't shoot the messenger. In my opinion his aforesaid assertion to me was a grave calumny. Some may strongly disagree, but my conscience -- after much consideration -- informs me that my extraordinary step of making it public at this time is fully justified.

The internal exile of Bp. Williamson should in my opinion never have been imposed. Furthermore, in my opinion its continuation is absolutely wrong and is (or at least should be!) an ongoing scandal to the faithful.

Where does Bp Fellay get off telling Bp Williamson he can’t be on the Internet anymore? If Fellays doing this as a bishop he can’t over ride another bishop and if he is doing it as superior, he’s out in left field. When people try to shut you up its because you have got something to say that they are afraid other people will hear. There’s too much of that going on. Let him put his material on the Internet and leave him in peace. Why are they throwing Williamson to the wolves? Does he write lies or the truth? That’s all that counts.

It seems Bishop Williamson's simplicity has finally done him in, as this will surely result in his expulsion from the SSPX.

Apparently, the goal of this treachery is precisely to get Bishop Williamson kicked out of the SSPX in the deluded belief that he will be able to be manipulated into becomming the leader of a new sedevacantist order?

You are gravely mistaken in your calculations!

I just spoke with someone who spoke to His Excellency this morning, and it certainly was not his wish that this letter be divulged!

All you have done this day is weaken tradition and hasten the appearance of the antichrist.

The thing is that there are people who love to see Bishop Williamson kicked out of the SSPX be they sedevacantist scoundrels like Stephen Heiner or soft hypersensitive sentimentalist neo-Trad types who are starving for a "reconciliation" - not too mention people like Krah (assuming he is underhanded - I haven't examined everything concerning him so I can't definitively, but I think he may be a bad egg).

Let's make sure no one is being manipulated here - be they Bishop Fellay, Bishop Williamson, or us simple laymen.

Man, has any body ever heard of journalism? Why do printing of the FACTS abut Bishop Fellay trying to kick Bishop Williamson out, equal = treachery?What a bunch of female hysterics. You don’t blame the messenger! They try to draw attention away from the scandal, mistreatment of Williamson.

Now Bishop Fellay you should answer. Who gives you the right to kick out another bishop? For what? Because he’s not politically incorrect?

If the mainstream media got a hold of this letter a lot of people commenting here would say it was news and we had to deal with it. Bt instead Maurice becomes the bad guy, not Bishop Fellay. That’s a good switch.

The gossip and personal attacks add up to a move to get us away from thinking about what Fellay has threatened to do.

Publishing his threat is going to make it come true? If it wasn’t published it wouldn’t come true? Don’t make me laugh! Your looking for a scapegoat. That way Fellay won’t get the blame.

Maurice, congratulations for being a JOURNALIST and giving us the true news, that Bishop Fellay intends to expel Bishop Williamson. Maybe he’ll be too embarrassed to do it, now that it is out in the light.

I have one criticism. You ought to keep the girlie gossips off this page. They spread rumors and calumnize. A lot of people are glad you shined a light on this.

Ave Maria!«At the beginning of October a new inter-religious meeting took place at Fatima. It is the same thing as Assisi. […] How can any agreement [with Rome] be possible under such conditions? How can we pass over such aberrations in silence? We reject all "nuanced" agreements, we affirm the contradiction between the true and the false, and we assert our firm will to have nullam partem (no part) in such an enterprise. Why? Quite simply, because we want to remain Catholics. We must turn our backs with horror and disgust on such a way of seeing the Church and living in "communion." How can anyone claim that modernist "Rome" has changed and is becoming favorable to Tradition? What delusion!»+Bishop FellayLETTER TO FRIENDS AND BENEFACTORS #65http://www.angelusonline.org/index.php?section=articles&subsection=show_article&article_id=2251Why did Bishop Fellay changed his mind? Because for sure, that modernist “Rome” hasn’t changed: within few weeks, it will renew Assisi.

Maurice Pinay you have done what had to be done! I've been an SSPX faithful for twenty years. I personally dont want the Society to team up with "Modernist Rome", but Bp Fellay surely gives me the impression that he does. Let the Society split up......

Is this supposed to be a Catholic blog? How can the author of this blog in good conscience post a private letter (of such a personal nature) between two Bishops. This is a scandalous action on your part Maurice Pinay, shame on you for doing so and May God have mercy on you for perhaps causing great damage to the Church of Christ with your gossip and scandal-mongering.Make no mistake, you will have to answer for this on judgement day.

Is your poster aware that Stephen Heiner was/is a publisher of Bp. Williamson?If sedevacantists are " scoundrels " what should we call all those people from various religious groupings attending Benedict XVI's Assisi III ?

Bp. W and those priests and laity supporting him have a primary duty to challenge the way the work of Archbishop Lefebvre is being compromised; more so than to keep to secretarial niceties while rival bishops lock horns within a community. In the long run the bigger picture will be how a bishop of the Church kept the flame of tradition alive and did not allow himself to be tamed by waves of liberalism.

\\If you were to refuse to heed this directive, it would mean both your not being invited to the Albano meeting and the starting of the canonical procedure leading to exclusion from the SSPX.\\

Question: How can a bishop who, according to Pope Benedict himself, exercises NO legitimate ministry in the Catholic Church, and therefore has NO canonical standing threaten ANYBODY with "canonical procedure"?

Assuming the letter is genuine, it was obviously a piece of private correspondence. I would expect anyone with a Catholic conscience to respect the privacy of both the sender and the recipient. The only possible result of publishing the letter is to sow discord. Everyone involved in making this public should be ashamed.

Bishop Fellay would never win a canonical attempt to oust Bishop Williamson. Bishop Williamson publishes the truth which is an absolute defense. Just because he does not go along with the party line about joining the Novus Ordo does not mean there is a basis to kick him out. The Novus Ordo is not even a Christian Organization. They say that faith in Christ is not necessary for salvation. That is not even Protestantism, that is a non-Christian position. Who can blame Bishop Williamson for opposing that? Bishop Fellay should be sued for exceeding the scope of his office if he gives away authority to a non-Christian organization like the Novus Ordo in violation of the most basic tenents of the SSPX.

I expected that the followers of the author of this letter would exhaust every method of killing the messenger. The law of mesira or omerta is at least as strongly in place in traditionalism as any Hasidic ghetto or Sicilian crime family.

Whether now or later every pious and/or hysterical naysayer will have to face the reality of this situation, which in truth, Bp. Fellay himself has put on public display for nearly 3 years now. Generally, it's the implied law of mesira and his unceasing mystifications which allow him to behave so brazenly.

This letter contains very little news but it does illustrate matters rather concisely for those who haven't been paying attention or have been willfully avoiding the true state of affairs.

The question that should be asked is who ultimately benefits from this private communication being made public.

When the obvious conclusion is drawn it may, perhaps, present a more likely scenario of its leaking.

Bishop Williamson certainly does not stand to gain from its publication at the present time. It was published without his permission and he is angry that it has been made public; a fact that can be easily confirmed should anyone wish to phone and ask him about it.

Its publication merely results in more internal SSPX pressure being put upon His Lordship, and his good name eaten away with suspicions that he has been - as the text of the communication boldly claims - indiscreet. It makes him look very foolish in his choice of trusted friends and advisors, and it gives the appearance of the good bishop being prone to allowing his emotions to rule his reason in a misguided attempt to hit back at Bishop Fellay.

On the other hand, Bishop Fellay does not gain from its publication either. His control freakery, machiavellian operating procedure, despotism and spiteful way of treating people he finds himself at odds with - things all well known amongst SSPX clerics - is now apparent for the world to see and to understand.

So who else could have leaked this communication - sent to Williamson by Fellay in the form of an email, not a letter, and written in French?

It is certain that the communication was copied to a number of Fellay's inner circle at Menzingen and further afield.

Two names from amongst this circle come immediately to mind. Fr. Pfluger, who for some time now has been attempting to play off and discredit both Williamson and Fellay to anyone who will listen in the hope of fulfilling his own puffed-up ambitions in regard to the leadership of SSPX.

Krah, Menzingen's lawyer introduced to the inner circles of SSPX by Fr. Pfluger, is a conduit between Menzingen and the world of International Finance, Freemasonry and Judaism.

For the past three years Krah, with the co-operation of Fellay and Pfluger, has been hell-bent on attempting to remove Bishop Williamson from within SSPX; a fact well-established and chronicled by the Krahgate investigation and by Stephen Heiner.

It is clear that neither Williamson nor Fellay stand to gain from the publication of the content of this private email at the present time. The ultimate beneficiaries of its publication are Pfluger, Krah, Masonry and Judaism.

"Bishop Fellay does not gain from its publication... His control freakery, machiavellian operating procedure, despotism and spiteful way of treating people he finds himself at odds with - things all well known amongst SSPX clerics - is now apparent for the world to see and to understand.”

What careful thinker would jump to the conclusion that Bp. Williamson or one of his friends would leak the letter? While that is a possibility, it is at least as likely that one of Bp. Fellay's confidants would leak the letter to provide a pretext for accusing and further ostracizing Bp Williamson.

What started as clericalism has rotted into tyranny.

Bp. Williamson spoke truth. It is truth that put him in the crosshairs of the synagogue of Satan. But why the fratricide? Is fratricide traditional?

It is truth about Judaism and its fables (Titus 1:14) that has been pulled from the SSPX websites. Is concealment of the truth traditional? Did Jesus conceal the truth? Excepting Peter's denials, did the Apostles ever conceal the truth? Have the Saints and Doctors of the Church concealed the truth?

Is it prudent to conceal or endorse the lies of the synagogue of Satan? Is that traditional?

Hell no!

What we are seeing from the sanctimonious defenders of Bp. Fellay and his regime of malefactors (Krah, Pfluger, Hegenberger, et al.) are EXACTLY the same rationalizations used by the Novus Ordo neo-Pharisees when they concealed and enabled the sodomite rapists. I spit on those rationalizations.

Jesus did not tell us that concealment and lies would set us free. He said the TRUTH will set us free.

The Novus Ordo has made itself a sect of the synagogue of Satan. It increasingly appears that Bp. Fellay's regime and defenders are willing to sacrifice the truth to join that sect.

Antagonists of the truth, get over your embarrassment. Bp Fellay's letter only confirms what any discerning eye could have seen for years. This letter offers an opportunity for the Faithful to hold Bp. Fellay to justly account for his behavior—as is our right!

None of these are great friends of yours, and their contempt for you is (shamefully) public.

This affair has all the halmarks of one trying to rid oneself of an enemy, rather than that of a careless indiscretion:

Certainly it would be used against a stupid, ignorant, and brainwashed public to justify an expulsion from the SSPX (i.e., I can see them all now, nodding their heads, as if to say, "Bishop Fellay said no more indiscretions!"), perhaps to accomplish the goal of an agreement with Rome that the Jews will find less distasteful with you out of the picture (and this just 2 weeks before the blasphemy in Assisi is about to convene: Yet another amazing coincidence, and very convenient timing!).

Yes, it would be very instructive indeed to learn the identity of this treacherous person.

Seeing that people like Fr. Phluger are apparently no fans of Bishop Williamson and would like to see him kicked out, it may be appropriate for Maurice Pinay to reveal his source for the sake of preventing Bishop Williamson from getting kicked out of the SSPX - assuming that the revealing of this letter came from the posited Phluger-Krah faction, assuming of course that such a faction exists.

Unfortunately the majority of the SSPX faithful and clergy "drink the kool-aid". Every minor "superior" has been hand-picked by Bishop Fellay. The end result of his double term as superior and such stacking of the deck should be obvious to all.

Bishop Fellay, Fr. Schmidberger et al have been pulling the wool over the SSPX faithful's eyes for quite some time. They repeatedly quote Bishop Lefebvre anachronistically and out of context.

Rome is more apostate today than it was 25 years ago!!! Reunion is not an option at this time. I recommend the faithful to remind the $$PX of this obvious fact in the collection basket.

They currently are attacking in the legal forum those who have republished his sermons and talks against their "holy" will. They were published in their entirety precisely to expose the leadership's dishonesty and in the end the true agenda of the "neo-SSPX".

Ok, full disclosure: in the nearly five years that I've been running this blog I've received a total of $25USD (yes, twenty five US dollars) in total 'revenue' from all sources--one donor on one occasion last winter which I am no less grateful for. That $25 paid half of my internet bill for one of the 58 months I've been operating here. Internet service is not my only expense. At this rate it will be many more years before I take in 40 paper dollars!

No, I will not divulge my source. It has nothing to do with silver. It has to do with journalism--real journalism, not the kind you people are accustomed to where the 'journalists' have cozy, profitable relationships with the entities and individuals they 'report' on.

What sanctimonious tone Bp Fellay has adopted!. But, hasn't he been duplicit with the faithful - the people who keep the SSPX going - these past several years. Where does the money come from to pay all their bills? Now we have a "Doctrinal Preamble" that is a secret. Is there also a "Secret Catechism" that we do not know of?

If Maurice Pinay was a man of honour he would have checked with Bp Williamson, before posting the Bp Fellay document. If Bp Williamson was a man of honour he would not adopt the pose of innocence on the affair - which does not ring true. Alternatively he would privately have asked Maurice Pinay to withdraw the document. He may be trapped in England but he continues to make trouble in every which way he can. very sad.

Seeing that people like Fr. Phluger are apparently no fans of Bishop Williamson and would like to see him kicked out, it may be appropriate for Maurice Pinay to reveal his source for the sake of preventing Bishop Williamson from getting kicked out of the SSPX"

For all practical purposes he has already been kicked out. You read the letter, he can't see the preamble or go to the meeting unless he provides an oath in writing that he will no longer publish online letter. What good is it to be a member of the SSPX if he has to cease contact with the outside world?

Although I am working on a new article for the "vast" readership of this site, which should be posted by tomorrow morning, I did want to take a brief moment to provide you with a bit of news.

A letter that was sent to Bishop Richard Williamson by Bishop Bernard Fellay, the Superior General of the Society of Saint Pius X, has appeared at mauricepinay.blogspot.com. Although His Excellency Bishop Williamson is indeed quite aware of my own position concerning the state of the Church Militant in this time of apostasy and betrayal, he has always been unfailingly kind to me whenever I have communicated with him. This was the case today as I sought to ascertain the authenticity of the letter.

[This corrects an earlier posting that was based upon my own misreading of His Excellency's words]: Bishop Williamson noted that the letter that has been posted is genuine. That letter, however, was sent to him by mistake, he has been told by a district superior who attended the meeting with Bishop Fellay in Albano, Italy, on October 7, 2011. It was at that meeting that Bishop Fellay said that the letter that Bishop Williamson received was sent by mistake, that a second letter, which does not contain the threat of expulsion from the Society of Saint Pius X, was meant to have been sent. Bishop Williamson reports that he has not received this second letter and that he has not been informed by Bishop Fellay that a "mistake" had been made.

One would presume that the that the threat of expulsion has been withdrawn as result of the information given Bishop Fellay from the district superior who attended last week's meeting. As Bishop Fellay has not communicated with Bishop Williamson directly about that he said at the district superiors' meeting last week was a "mistake," this is, obviously, just a presumption for the moment. Time will tell.

What is indisputable, it appears, is that Bishop Williamson is still under "orders" to remain "silent" and not to publish his Eleison newsletter.

Bishop Williamson also related what is publicly known: that the district superiors of the Society of Saint Pius X expressed their opposition to the proposed "doctrinal preamble" when they met with Bishop Fellay in Albano, Italy, on October 7, 2011. His Excellency was very grateful for the firmness of the district superiors.

Bishop Tissier de Mallerais (who is at my church today for Confirmations) last night told us the SSPX is NOT going to sign the paper given to them by the Vatican. This is good news. We know that within the SSPX there are those who want to make some kind of deal with the Vatican who is still modern and who still follows the demonic changes of VII. All I know is that Bishop Williamson is NOT a Nazi and he should be able to write his newsletter because in these days of apostasy he is a voice of truth like Fr. Coughlin, Fr. Fahey, Poncins, etc. If you can't handle the truth then you won't like Bishop Williamson. God warns us in Apocalypse 2:9 who the enemy is and it's not Bishop Williamson! If you haven't read Poncin's books, I encourage you to do so now.

As a long-term member of sspx I have never understood and not will is why the sspx has not thrown out this most dislikeable Bishop Williamson not just because of his unintelligent remarks about the holocaust, but because of his continuous write-ups "kyrie eleison" thereafter although he had been told be the society to just shut up!!!!

I am a member of sspx in Germany where the situation is quite different from that in England. I have never understood and never will, why the sspx has not thrown out Bishop Williamson not so much because of his stupid holocaust remarks but because of his disobedience to the sspx to stop all further publishing. Instead, he starts kyrie eleison!!! Because of his arrogance he left his proper ecclesiastical field and ventured into histoy. With what an outcome? And with which results? Was this a lack of intelligence or a lack of sensitivity? Kids are told to think before they speak!!!I hold him accountable for the energy, time and money the sspx (and their believers)had to spend and the worries they had to endure (as well as my sleepless nights)because of him. And, God only knows what a hard job the responsible leaders of sspx have and how they have to defend themselves constantly for sticking to the true teachings of the Church!!

Do these "true teachings of the Church" include the the Gospel and Acts of the Apostles? If so, I cannot ascertain how Jesus Christ and St. Stephen fit in. Where in the Gospel is the justification for this timidity, respect of persons, fear of the world's opinions, fear of the Pharisees' opinions?

I offer my prayers for the poor souls of Germany. May God miraculously heal them and remove the mental and spiritual scars of 60 years of 'Holocaust' guilt-bashing evident here.

There are those who very much want for Bp. Williamson to leave the SSPX so that he will venture out on his own and become the official spokesperson for Revisionism (without any limitations from the SSPX, of course!)

That's an interesting conspiracy theory. Is that the "Anglo saxon" contingent Msgr. Fellay references among his rationalizations for banishment?

What is well known is that there are those who want Bp. Williamson to live the remainder of his life confined and gagged to prevent any possibility of him speaking outside Pharisee-defined limits in secular or ecclesiastical matters (and 'secular' matters encroaching upon ecclesiastical matters) and that Bp. Fellay is the enforcer of this mandate. This is the greater evil as I see it.

I think we can all agree it was a private letter and should have been kept private.

I find the situation with Bishop Williamson tragic because I am 100% convinced he is sitting with truth on his side, while being hit over the head for expressing it.

I am a practicing Catholic and I side with the remarks Bishop Williamson has made regarding the Holocaust.

I am not a Nazi, but an American citizen who remains neutral on the political parties. I began an exhaustive research effort to uncover the truth of the holocaust roughly fifteen years ago when I was told by a powerful and high ranking Catholic priest, ( not SSPX ) the Holocaust never happened as claimed. It left me speechless. I quietly sought to disprove his claims. In time, I saw that the Holocaust claims were all traceable to wartime propaganda offices and there was no forensic evidence to prove any gassing of humans by Germany. In debates with Ph.D level believers, I am left trying to deal with people who add new material to old stories. Call it moving the goal posts, if you will.

Allow me to offer a few facts for your consideration.

1.) Between 1949-1959 six world leaders in office during WW2 wrote books about their wartime experience. The subject of gas chambers does not appear in any of the six books. 2.) The US Army was told 22 death camps were operated in Germany, ( 16) and Poland, (6). Teams of US Army pathologists were dispatched to inspect the German camps in search of confirmation. Not one body was ever found with cyanide gas in it. Russia refused entry to the Polish camps. 99% of the modern day Holocaust gassing claims are from Polish camps.

3.) It is claimed 1,500,000 Jewish gassing victims were buried in Auschwitz. Auschwitz is built on a swamp, near two river, with a 2 foot water table.

4.) The International Red Cross has access to prisoners in the camps and could speak to them privately. They never reported anyone being gassed.

In the real world, money is often a hidden motive. During the past 40 years, paid Holocaust reparations have exceeded $100 billion American dollars to various entities. The cash flowing from this effort is not slowing down at all. It is increasing. Something to consider.

Lastly, a near identical effort was begun in NYC in 1919 and lasted until 1928. I am referring to a group of people making holocaust claims about 6,000,000 Jews. It was a massive program grossing $250,000,000 in that time period. Don Heddesheimer examined that event in his book, The First Holocaust. God Bless.

Perhaps you would be interested in the not terribly well-organized thoughts of someone who agrees with Bp. Williamson on a lot of things, and has a son at Winona who will be ordained in June, God willing.

Whatever is to be made of all this, I see no evidence of any doctrinal issue between Bp. Fellay and Bp. Williamson.

Those who denounced the publication of the letter seem to have been vindicated. All the blood and smoke turns out to have been expended on something that is not BF's considered opinion on the matters it covers, and no one who isn't privy to the second letter can offer anything but guesses on what that considered opinion is.

I can well understand why Bp. Fellay would want Bp. Williamson to stop publishing Eleison Comments, even if the monumental imprudence of November 2008 had never occurred; and I think that this desire is perfectly reasonable. Other than his hand-wringing about the possible seduction of the SSPX leadership by those Vatican smoothies, I doubt that much of EC bothered BF.

But the world does not need Eleison Comments, and his separate voice -- and separate following -- is fairly considered neither necessary nor advisable for the SSPX. All the problems with that separateness were of course exacerbated by the Williamson Affair.

So I think it a good bet that Bp. Williamson was indeed asked and eventually ordered to stop, and declined to do so. I really don't understand on what grounds he declined, and I think that BF would be well within his rights to dismiss him for doing so.

No doubt he has not been sacked because Bp. Fellay believes that it would lead to greater evils, both within and without the Society.

I also think that BF is far from crazy in thinking that the wrong kind of element tends to rally around BW, and that this tends to make the Society's job tougher. His concern may be exaggerated; but unlike the lot of us, his responsibilities in these matters extend beyond running his mouth.

Let me add that I myself don't rule out the worst hypotheses regarding the roles and intentions of Pfluger and Krah, and it's obvious that BF has listened to them far too much. But I see no evidence that BF himself is part of the hypothetical conspiracy to turn the SSPX over to Judaeo-Masonry.

Furthermore, there's no getting around the fact that Bp. Williamson is a problem, and that a good deal of that problem would go away if he would just stop writing EC.

I think that the SSPX needs him as a bishop more than a handful of devotees need another Holocaust revisionist, 9/11 truther and exegete of "Tinturn Abbey" and "Dover Beach." --

Mr McFarland, I previously spared you the embarrassment of publishing your unfounded pontifications, but since you persist and will certainly continue to do so at that kosher-consensus generating outfit 'Rorate Caeli' (which isn't interested in what I have to say) I think it's well to give context for your musings:

"This is a fake, and a pretty clumsy one at that.

Items 1-3 are the sort of blather that is constantly circulated concerning the SSPX. That Bishop Fellay would give them credence is absurd..."

Which goes to show how little you understand the society you speak so much about.

It has been discovered recently on another blog that a new record of dicastery activities was just published for 2010. It is found that, from that year, this Pope has formed a commission to revise and update the 1962 Missal. "Universæ Ecclesiæ" calls for the prefaces of the noxious Novus Ordo to be intruded into the 1962 Mass.

23 June, 2012—next year—is the fiftieth anniversary of the publication of the 1962 editio typica, and this Pope, judging from other key events, loves anniversaries and symbolically important dates.

Clearly, Benedict XVI plans to begin the wreckovation of the 1962 Missal next year, probably in June. This is part of his plan to create the ‘classic’ Missal, one which blends NewMass with TrueMass. In other words, the Pope is loading his shotgun while talking peace to Bishop Fellay. Another term for this sort of behaviour is ‘bargaining in bad faith’. I suggest that Bishop Fellay ‘decline to sign’ until we have an undertaking in writing that the Pope will not pollute our Mass with anything touched by the vile heretical hand of Bugnini the Barbarian. In this aftermath of a revolution, we need a moratorium on future change for another fifty years at the least. Bishop Fellay should not sign one damned thing until the Pope dissolves this nefarious commission of wreckovation.

If Fr. Coughlin wasn't silenced he would have kept us out of WWII and tens of millions of souls would not have needlessly been killed. We would likely have been out of the 'Federal' 'Reserve' racket decades ago and we would not be on the way to mass starvation and homelessness.

Speaking against such catastrophic, anti-Christ evil certainly is the business of a priest but when big finance gets leverage over the churches--and it does have massive leverage over the churches, including SSPX churches--preaching against war, banking and the 'elder brothers' so often responsible is the first casualty.

Things have gotten so bad that it's commonplace to hear Novus Ordo parishes ask God's blessing for the 'international war on terrorism.'

I stand with the handful of prelates with enough of a backbone to go against the pharisaic tyranny over the pulpit, like Fr. Coughlin and Bp. Williamson.

If you don't stand with them when they stand for truth you get phony leaders like BXVI and Fellay, and deserve it. There's no way around it, I'm afraid.

There is a stark difference between what is happening to Bishop Williamson today and what happened to Fr. Coughlin in the 1930's. The effort to silence Fr Coughlin in the 1930's left no stone unturned. The government had to change some broadcast laws in order to force him off the air. Fr. Coughlin spoke the truth and spent years warning Americans the War Merchants were planning a global war, and taxpayers would bear the cost of it. He was 100% right. War Merchants and Bankers hated him while most Catholics supported him. Today, when Bishop Williamson speaks the truth, his most vocal critics are fellow Catholics. My personal opinion is Bishop Williamson was thrown under the bus because he dared to question the modern day version of the Holocaust. ( the initial claims were Jews were killed by giant steam chambers...none were ever found) Pope Pius XII never acknowledged Jews being killed in gas chambers and he lived until 1958. Neither did Stalin, Churchill, DeGaulle, Eisenhower, Truman, Gen Patton or Franco.

"There is a stark difference between what is happening to Bishop Williamson today and what happened to Fr. Coughlin in the 1930's ... most Catholics supported [Fr. Coughlin].Today, when Bishop Williamson speaks the truth, his most vocal critics are fellow Catholics.

I have never been interested in investigating 'modern day conspiracy theories' such as JFK, 911 or the Holocaust in part because they seemed so emotionally charged. Last year I had the chance to talk privately with a retired FBI agent who worked JFK threat assessments before the murder and worked on the case after the murder. He gave me a lengthy briefing on the matter and proved to me, beyond all doubt, JFK 's murder was a professional hit and LHO was innocent. I later came to see 911 and the Holocaust for what they are. They are actions that protect or enrich small but powerful elements of society. If you dare to doubt the official version of these 3 events, you could place your job and reputation in danger, maybe even your life. Promoting open 'public' doubt threatens those who are carrying on with a coverup or are benefitting financially from a fraud. Bishop Williamson has crossed into their "space" by doubting the Holocaust script. The defenders of that space are as mean and unforgiving as ever. Being a Holocaust heretic means you can never be forgiven.

Thanks to John McFarland for writing a literate comment and posting it under his own name. His comment is nuanced and temperate but also naive and too concerned for diplomacy.

Where is there evidence that Bishop Fellay wrote Bishop Williamson two letters? An instant legend came about in the past two days about how Bishop Fellay didn’t intend to send Bishop Williamson the letter that Pinay published. This is an alibi of the "dog ate my homework” variety.

Mr. McFarland should remember that Bishop Fellay was consecrated by Archbishop Lefebvre with the same rights to speak and write as Bishop Williamson.

If God is using Bishop Williamson, why should he be silenced? If Bishop Williamson’s resistance to the proposed deal with the Vatican and the priests and laity who support his resistance turn out to be a factor in Bishop Fellay declining Benedict’s offer, then the value of Bishop Williamson’s public expression is obvious, although I doubt that Williamson’s enemies will give him credit for anything good.

Archbishop Lefebvre resisted the pope himself over principle. Bishop Williamson has the right to resist Bishop Fellay in the same vein.

Fellay’s statement in the letter to Williamson about an “Anglo-Saxon” conspiracy behind Williamson helps me understand why Frenchmen control and shepherd the SSPX in America. Fellay is a Gaullist chauvinist. That’s a very bad thing in a bishop who leads an international society. The French have to struggle against their humorless tendencies and their inclination to tyrannize and regard the laity as dirt. Priests of the Fraternity of St. Peter are more kind and approachable; more like fathers, less like dictators. Some American priests of the SSPX are that way, as Bishop Williamson himself is.

Thank you, Maurice Pinay, for your enlightened remarks, with which I agree. An earlier question asked, 'Why did Bp F write an email to Bp W rather than a letter?' Good question. It would have remained far more confidential that way. It is sad to see how misinformed many of our own Trads are about Bp F's powers. He is the Superior of the Society only because the 3 other bishops originally agreed he should be. But this was for a limited period. He was begged, by one of the bishops (I cannot say who), to step down some while ago, but it would seem, sadly, that power can and does go to a man's head. There are anomalies in the way some priests are treated, because they may bring Bp F's attention to behaviour of some other priest or superior that is detrimental to the SSPX, and I do know of a couple of cases, and I believe others could name more names, but if the culprits are personal appointments of Bp F, then the accuser may well find himself sent to 'quieter' places out of hearing of the rest of us. Indeed, a lamentable state of affairs.

This blog - by which I mean Maurice Pinay's website, not this post in particular - reminds me of Belloc's remarks on one of Nesta Webster's little volumes of conspiracist fiction:

"In my opinion it is a lunatic book. She is one of those people who have got one cause on the brain. It is the good old 'Jewish revolutionary' bogey. But there is a type of unstable mind which cannot rest without morbid imaginings, and the conception of a single cause simplifies thought. With this good woman it is the Jews, with some people it is the Jesuits, with others Freemasons and so on. The world is more complex than that."

One might apply the same words to some of Bishop Williamson's "musings". I do not know if my saying as much will result in this comment being spiked, but at least I have the satisfaction of knowing that Maurice Pinay will have read it.

As for the situation in the Society: I find myself wondering how Bishop Fellay could initiate a "canonical procedure" against Bishop Williamson, given that the Society currently has no canonical standing.

Funny, there are those who said Belloc was himself obsessed with "Jews." He did write a book called "The Jews," didn't he? Regarding your quote, he knew what he had to do to fit into the 'polite' society many of the conspirators themselves inhabit. Fortunate for him, his times didn't require the slavish depravity required of that 'polite' fellow Bill Buckley.

Edoardo, if calling me a 'Jew'-obsessed kook makes you more comfortable with your compromises with the world and its anti-Christ standards, you have my pity and prayers.

"...Nothing to do with advancing the traditionalist cause. You offer no religious justification. It's just that old journalism line. Pathetic...'

Things done in secret are of the Devil.

The exposing of that said in the Dark is religiously justified.

The Bishop Fellay Regime should count it's lucky stars much more wasn't released... I would not be surprised a computer expert was brought into headquarters to wash all e-mails and correspondence after this incident.

B. Williamson's days in the SSPX are numbered. He is being set up for the ouster. B. Fellay is setting B. Williamson and his followers up as a target for every Jewish group from here to Tel Aviv. They have thrown him to the wolves.

All I have to say in response to HallNOates (who knows what his/her real name is, and who cares?) libelous writings on here about me is that I have not now, and will never, agitate for the expulsion of Bishop Williamson from the SSPX. Indeed, there is direct evidence over years of work that I have done everything possible to keep him working within the SSPX.

If HallNOates had any guts to match his rather large mouth, he would call Bishop Williamson in London to verify that fact, and then post an apology and retraction for defaming a man's character. Character assassination is not permitted to Catholics.

But, I don't expect him to do that. He's much better at being an accusing, defaming "scoundrel" himself. Don't they teach anything about "evidence" or "investigation" in law school?

I was thinking of just staying out of this discussion because so many others have posted reasonable replies which have pretty much said it all. But there is one thought I would like to pass on.

I have met His Excellency and have noticed that yes, sadly, he can sometimes be imprudent. I say this without any rancour on my part because I am very much like him in that respect; sometimes I blurt out things that I shouldn't. But if I were able to advise His Excellency on a number of things I would say the following.

Firstly, I would encourage him to take a leaf out of the book of the late Abbe de Nantes. This man, rightly or wrongly, caused considerable consternation in ecclesiastical circles by obeying his lawful superiors in the matter of his priestly duties and yet continued to calmly, yet forcefully speak the truth. This drove his modernist enemies nuts because they couldn't assail him with the club of "disobedience". Certainly they ridiculed him and marginalized him but they could do nothing to him because of the stand he took. I am not saying this is a perfect example for Bishop Williamson to follow, but it does offer him some food for thought.

The second thing I would advise him to consider if I had the opportunity would be to build an unassailable wall against his enemies by merely pointing out that his discussions of the actual numbers of people who suffered under Fascist regimes only reflect the very same opinions held by Pope Pius XII. Pius doubted those numbers as well which, of course, is the reason he is so vilified today by the usual suspects. They are fully aware of Pius' skepticism concerning the extent of these sufferings and as they brook no dissent on this point they are doing everything they can to blacken his memory. It is a shameful exercise, but there you have it. If Bishop Williamson would confine himself to quietly reminding his tormentors that he is only joining Pius in his skepticism his position would be well-nigh unassailable, at least in Church circles. This stance of his would also do much to weaken this Rome/Tel Aviv love fest that has brought so much shame to the one, true Church. If he took this approach he would indeed be "wise as a serpent."

I also hope that Williamson does not go down the dead-end road of sedevacantism; that would be a disaster for not only him but the important issues he raises. If, God forbid, he does that then he has well and truly cooked his own goose.

As to his relations with Bishop Fellay I do not know enough about that to comment on it. I do know that in a number of traditional orders they have imposed a sort of "sef-censorship" when it comes to discussions of that ultimate Taboo. They sense that, for whatever reason, this is not the time to get into that discussion and, obviously, are well aware that Rome is not thinking straight on that issue either at the moment, so they deem it prudent to avoid the topic. Whether this is the right approach or the wrong one I cannot say.

Other than that I wish the SSPX well, and I wish ALL of their Bishops well. We all have our "blind spots", something that everyone else can see but we can't see. We must work to eliminate these blind spots.

Regarding the holocaust, I am uncertain as to why people keep citing information such as whether or not Churchill ever claimed there were gas chambers. We have the testimonies given at the Nuremberg trials themselves.

Dan,What a wonderfully Catholic comment you have made! Most of those who have posted their thoughts are so lacking in true Catholic charity, and I was becoming disheartened until I read the last one - yours!

Please allow an important footnote here. Speaking of testimonies at Nurenberg, we also have testimony that a large number of Jews were killed in steam chambers as well as electrocution chambers in Germany and Poland. The judges accepted those hearsay accounts as fact, despite no evidence to support the claims. To prove my thesis that the holocaust is nothing more than a financial fraud consider the plight of Poland. The Holocaust industry demanded Poland pay $500 billion, yes billion, to a reparation fund. Why? Poland was invaded by Germany! The justification was Poland did not do enough to save Jews. The Catholic president of Poland bowed to this demand,but was able to lower the reparation amount to $80 billion. That is not all. The list of corporations that WILL be making LARGE payments to Holocaust promoters in the future is extensive. How do I know. I read what they have promised they will do. It is a shakedown. Hate crime laws were cleverly passed to silence any objections. Three years ago, I predicted that within a decade, the Catholic Church will ( as a gesture of goodwill) take up a collection one Sunday per year, in the worldwide church, for the Holocaust industry. I am starting to wonder if this recent flap about the Holocaust, is not the door opener the promoters have been waiting for, to secure their yearly goodwill donation.

I pray that someone will give Pope Benedict the facts. My comments here are shared by many Catholic priests, all over the world. I know this for an absolute fact.

As a non member of SSPX but a true traditional Catholic with great love of the EF of the Roman Rite, I say 'carry on with your infighting until you rejoin the one, true, catholic & apostolic Church'I'm not sure whether to laugh or cry at your antics!!Please note that I write under my own name & even use a photograph!

In America, the Holocaust is even taught in school is and yet the holocaust of Native Americans isn't. Also, no one wants to hear about Anti-Catholicism in America either.

Also, in Hollywood its ok to insult and misrepresent Catholics and Catholicism...

My ancestors helped promote Catholicism in Philadelphia and south Jersey. When the True Mass was being celebrated in their home the KKK was outside throwing rocks outside along with cursing and burning crosses on their lawn. the churches were finally built by the poor, including my ancestors. In NJ the first constitution discriminated against Catholics. Many brave priests dodged bullets and risked their lives and lived in poverty for the Holy Sacrifice of the true Mass.

The reparations that we received was the rapes of innocents, sexual harrassment and abuse of young seminarians, lies,stealing and greed cover-ups, indifference to sin and churches closed down. The Catholic faith and our churches which overcame religious persecution was finally destroyed by the novus ordo. I am a victim of sexual abuse by novus ordo. clergy....

I am so happy that I am now traditional Catholic.

I feel that we need to have Catholic Action along with prayers to God and the Holy Rosary. Also, the Holy Sacrifice of Mass and sacraments.

Instead of abusing Bishop Williamson, Bishop Fellay should be trying to Correct Rome and its errors and sins.

Stop using obedience as a poor excuse. the novus ordo used that excuse to justify anti-Catholicism from within. And yet many broke vows of chasity and crimes were committed. They did away with vows of poverty so they can live like hollywood movie stars with million dollar shore homes etc. Obedience should be given to God; not man.

They embrace vatican II and want to destroy all properties that were built before. They have forced out and/or retired good and holy priests and replaced them with Lutheran ministers, liberals etc. Martin luther hated Catholicism. Many from novus ordo are waiting in the closets hoping to come out inorder to push liberal sinful social justice, abortion etc.

Yes, while these novus ordo pedophiles priests, thieves, liars were being forgiven and moved from parish to parish.....

Bishop Lefebvre and many others of the traditional Catholic movement were being excommunicated by Rome.

"...the late Abbe de Nantes. This man, rightly or wrongly, caused considerable consternation in ecclesiastical circles by obeying his lawful superiors in the matter of his priestly duties and yet continued to calmly, yet forcefully speak the truth."

----

I don't see the parallel. If Bp. Williamson obeyed, he would be silent. How does a silenced man speak the truth?

Moreover, there is no perfect, ideal manner of preaching that fits every occasion. I would not have told Fr. Coughlin to be more like Abbe de Nantes. I would not have told Abbe de Nantes to be more like St. John Chrysostom, etc., etc.

Further, If St. John Chrysostom, perennially regarded as the greatest orator in the history of the Church, was preaching today he would be a far greater cause of scandal to the sensitivities on display here than Bp. Williamson.

I fear that the modern world's insane standards weigh much too heavily with these traditionalists.

Well, you spared me the embarrassment until it provided an opportunity to (1) make me look like a jerk as a pretext for (2) not responding to my second set of remarks.

In a quasi-defense of my misjudgment of the letter, let me offer the observation that Bp. Fellay seems to have agreed with me that the remarks of the letter weren't worthy of him, and so did not intend to send it.

But be that as it may, let's get down to brass tacks.

The chief problem with you and many of the other contributors to this string is that you are revisionists who happen to be Catholics, rather than Catholics who happen to be revisionists.

In particular, you seem to have no sense that the member of a society of common life without vows, headed up by a superior general, is under an obligation to obey that superior.

Obedience gets interesting precisely when you obey the orders that you don't like, or think are wrongheaded, or even a sure-fire recipe for disaster. I could spend the rest of my life cutting and pasting statements of the saints to that effect.

There are limitations to one's obligations to obey. But someone needs to explain to me why an order to stop publishing Eleison Comments exceeds those limits.

Many of you seem to believe what one poster has come right out and said -- that BW should chuck the SSPX and really get serious about his revisionism.

Your friend Michael Hoffman is wont to talk of Holocaustianity. There are a number of entries on this string that might with only mild exaggeration be styled Revisionistianity.

But what doth it profit a man if he reduce the Holocaust Industry to the moral equivalent of Jerusalem at the end of 70 A.D., and suffer the loss of his soul?

According to historian David Irving, the official transcripts of the Nuremburg Trials are unreliable. I read his documented book on the subject and it made sense to me. There is also a section on the manner in which the "six million" number came about. It's a useful and good read IMO.

The SSPX is the last 'organized' bastion holding out against the near all-encompassing and near all victorious forces of the the Enemy, and his minions in the Synagogue of Satan and its slaves and servants.

To quote Haldir of Lothlorien; "In nothing is the power of the Dark Lord more clearly shown than in the estrangement that divides all those who still oppose him."

Alas, for many reasons it is itself an imperfect vessel, because of the diabolic disorientation of our times, and the fact that the earthly seats of authority inside and outside the Church are largely occupied by the Enemy.

We are in a hot war, a war to the death with an Enemy that collectively is much more aware of our status as its enemy than we (the Remnant Faithful) are aware of them as ours. They are playing for keeps, and it is time we Men stood up and organized, planned and help each other to survive in these trying times and to Restore Holy Mother Church.

"It is not our part to master all the tides of the world, but to do what is in us for the succour of those years wherein we are set, uprooting the evil in the fields that we know, so that those who live after may have clean earth to till. What weather they shall have is not ours to rule. "

Dear Mr. McFarland, I apologize for my manner of speaking to you. I confess that my disdain for that consensus-forming operation Rorate Caeli has been misdirected towards a few persons commenting here. I stand by the content of my comments nevertheless.

Regarding your most recent comments, Bp. Fellay does not obey the man who he says is Pope in all matters. That is plainly evident. Bp. Fellay is not due more obedience than the Pope. Where his punishments and mandates are an extension of the will of the rabbis and Judaic power organizations--and it is extreme naivety to say his handling of Bp. Williamson is anything other than this--he is due no obedience whatever.

Regarding your allusions to a revisionist conspiracy, the matter is simple. The intellectuals behind this "Holocaust" contrivance say plainly in their writings not intended for mass consumption that their intention is for "The Holocaust" to take the place of Calvary or at least for Christianity to be completely revised in reference to "The Holocaust." If this is unknown to you, as it would be to the sola Rorate Caeli crowd, this link will get you started:

So, we have a choice, either we uncover the facts about WWII and revise the propaganda that has been shoved down our throats for 60 years to conform with the truth, or our religion will continue to be revised according to that propaganda.

Does this help you to understand why revisionism is important to some of us Catholics?

Mr. McFarland writes, "In particular, you seem to have no sense that the member of a society of common life without vows, headed up by a superior general, is under an obligation to obey that superior." That is obviously true, but the statement must be understood in the context that faith as a theological virtue is of a higher order than the virtue of obedience. Where the faith is at stake obedience must play second fiddle. The faith of Catholics which they first received when they were baptized is at stake where it is undermined by a "fear of the Jews." The fact that many Catholics appear unaware of the undermining of their faith in this regard does not negate the problem, but augments it.

This fear of the "Jews" is a servile and despicable one. It is seen where Catholics cower in fear of speaking the truth on certain things due to -- and let's be most clear on this -- a fear of the "Jews." I place the word in quotes to save myself the endless discussion of what constitutes the true meaning of the word. (Cf. Revelation 2:9, 3:9)

Mr. McFarland states further: "There are limitations to one's obligations to obey. But someone needs to explain to me why an order to stop publishing Eleison Comments [EC] exceeds those limits." I would submit that during this critical time in the Church's history the publication of EC is a most praiseworthy act in the promotion and defense of the faith. Let those with eyes see it!

Mr. McFarland goes on to state that, "Michael Hoffman is wont to talk of Holocaustianity." This term "Holocautianity" is actually quite apropos and hopefully more and more people who read Mr. Hoffman's material on this subject will come to realize it. (One heroic leader/author of Catholic Action Mr. Hugh Akins is in full agreement with Mr. Hoffman concerning the problem of Holocaustianity. He looks at the subject in depth in his stunning and courageously written new book Synagogue Rising -- especially in Chapters 14 and 15. His book can be previewed at http://www.catholicactionresourcecenter.com/synagoguerising.htm. Mr. Atkins was personally befriended and supported in his work by Abp. Marcel Lefebvre.)

Finally, Mr. McFarland writes, "But what doth it profit a man if he reduce the Holocaust Industry to the moral equivalent of Jerusalem at the end of 70 A.D., and suffer the loss of his soul?" I would submit that this borders on being a nonsensical statement. At the same time though it serves to smear the efforts of those individuals who have labored tirelessly to counter the lies of Christ hating Judaism. A good number of those individuals are behind bars (as even Bp. Williamson might have been!) simply for stating their honest opinions about a fabrication of history which we and our children are continuously assaulted with by the sworn enemies of Jesus Christ.

St. Boniface, the patron saint of Germany is said to have taken an axe to the pagans' sacred oak tree. The fall of the mighty oak marked the fall of heathenism (cf http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02656a.htm) in the land known today as Germany. May the false Judaic god of the "sacred" Six Million Gas Chamber (Ain't no business like) $Shoah (business) fall as well -- the sooner the better.

As I said I didn't think my analogy was a perfect one, and your point is, of course, very well taken. What I should have said was that Abbe de Nantes avoided the strong temptation to become a sedevacantist or a schismatic. That was what I was trying to say; he wrote and spoke forcefully yet resisted the schismatic tendency. As such his position was impregnable. And I believe that Bishop Williamson should continue to speak out, tactfully but truthfully, on these matters because they are so crucial to Catholic life. That life is being strangled by the forces of those whose hatred of Christ and His Church is palpable.

Also, as I said already, there seems to be policy among certain traditionalist orders, who know very well the truth of these matters, to avoid speaking about them, so as to keep out of Rome's crosshairs while hoping and praying that God will at long last give us a courageous Pope who will put a stop to this Jewish stranglehold. Is this the right policy? My personal opinion is No, it isn't. But, again, I am not privy to the inner workings of these groups, their leaders and their negotiations with Rome so it would be hard for me say what's what.

I don't want Bishop Williamson to go schismatic; I want him to stay in the Church and to continue expressing his views with comeliness, thoughtfulness and courage.

THE PUBLICATION OF THIS PRIVATE LETTER IS UNETHICAL AND A GRAVE DISSERVICE TO THE CAUSE OF CATHOLIC TRADITION.

Assuming that Bishop Bernard Fellay’s private letter to Bishop Richard Williamson is genuine, it is a private letter whose publication was not authorized by the author or the recipient.

Those with a sense of ethics and a Catholic conscience respect the privacy of both the sender and the recipient. The only possible motive for publishing this private letter is to sow discord among Catholics faithful to Tradition and harm the cause of Catholic Tradition.

Those involved in recklessly making this private correspondence public are not ethical, lack credibility and are henceforth not worthy of trust.

Dr. Carlos Diaz Lujan, Bp. Fellay forgoes his right to confidentiality by his abuse of his brother plainly evident in this letter but certainly not limited to it. I'm ashamed of the people who've been standing by silently as this situation has escalated. Call it an intervention.

The code of omerta is so entrenched in this community I wouldn't count on many of these people to report a rape if they witnessed it.

If you're interested in defending tradition it would be helpful if you alerted your contacts to this Bernardo Benes fellow in your area; a banker who has done work with the CIA in the past. His energy seems mostly dedicated to Judaizing Catholic schools these days. Here's a couple leads:

Why do sedes wrestle so much with the Church's doctrine of necessity???

You hold to the false doctrine that if the pope is the pope, we must obey him in all things, otherwise he is not the pope???

What part of necessity don't you get?

To pretend that Bishop Williamson doesn't have to obey Bishop Fellay because Boshop Fellay doesn't "obey" the pope (in areas he cannot compel obedience, such as legislation contrary to faith and morals) is sophomorish.

All ethical people know that the confidentiality of a private letter is not contingent upon the manner in which the author of the letter treats the recipient or vice versa. A letter’s confidentiality is contingent upon the expressed will of the parties to the letter.

In this case, both the author and the recipient of this private letter have expressed the will that the letter remain private. The letter’s publication is, therefore, unethical and those involved in recklessly making this private correspondence public are not ethical, lack credibility and are henceforth not worthy of trust.

As for Mr. Bernardo Benes, he is well known in this community for his work on behalf of the United States government. Anyone can be “dedicated to Judaizing Catholic schools these days,” but only those Catholics or those masquerading as “Catholics” who oversee Catholic schools can allow or not allow their Judaizing. Therefore, if Catholic schools are Judaized we should not fault people like Mr. Benes, but of those Catholics who allow this Judaizing to occur.

Dr. Carlos Diaz Lujan, Judaizing abusers of children are responsible for their abuse as well as their 'Catholic' enablers.

Likewise, the rabbis and Judaic power organizations are responsible for their abuse of the upright bishop Richard Williamson as well as their proxy, Bp. Fellay whose 'right to confidentiality' in this capacity you claim I've violated.

As far as I know mine is the only 'wrong' of the above matters you've bothered to protest. If so, I find fault with your sense of proportion.

Bishop Williamson did not intend to Speak Out on the Holocaust. He let the truth get the better of him.

When he put his foot in it, he did not mention the last twenty or so years of revisionist scholarship. He clearly has not been a very involved revisionist, although maybe he's got up to speed during his enforced leisure.

He has not Spoken Out since, or even come close, or even hinted at revisionism. Most of the ECs have been unexceptionable from the point of view of Bishop Fellay. But some of them constitute less tan subtle nipping at Bishop Fellay's heels. It is all pretty low octane, but one can hardly blame Bishop Fellay for considering this disloyal, since it is; and thinking that it is attracting guys like you to him, since it is.

I'm afraid I can't take your defenses of his apparent disobedience seriously. When he's not talking about religion, what he says is pretty small beer, except for the annoyance it causes the Society, and he doesn't pretend otherwise.

Basically, he wants to stay in the Society, but he doesn't want to shut up even though what he is saying is really not terribly important to anybody.

Frankly, this is not a particularly heroic stance, and I'm more than a little surprised that the revisionists and Talmudophobes have rallied round him. That they have is just more evidence for my contention that at bottom, they're revisionists first and Catholics second. So is their apparent willingness to believe almost any malarkey about the Society and Bishop Fellay. He's nearly as ritually unclean to you for believing in the Holocaust as you are to organized Jewry for rejecting it.

I would admit one exception to this analysis: Bishop Williamson's most recent EC on the theology of the Jews.

I am quite in favor of people knowing the truth about the H. Bishop Williamson's remarks about "de-clawed Catholics" have a considerable amount of truth about them.

But I think such things are primarily laymen's work, not the clergy's.

And I know for sure that when revisionism gets crosswise with the Faith, it must give ground.

P.S. Among the Society and its faithful, one sometimes hears a contrast being drawn between Bishop Williamson and his successor as the rector at Winona, Fr. Yves Le Roux. It is said even by priests of the Williamson era that whereas Bishop Williamson trained his seminarians to do battle with the world, Fr. Le Roux forms holy priests. Now to be sure, a holy priest is going to get crosswise with the world pretty quickly. But the question of the starting point is an important one.

On a more personal note: I didn't finally give up on Buckleyite Catholicism as Part of the Shtick in order to take up Revisionist Catholicism as Part of the Shtick.

When I saw the Jews' persecution of Bishop Williamson who hounded him through their instruments of press, police and politics, I could not help but feel great sympathy for his plight. What a horrible cross he bore, and he received absolutely no sympathy or support from his Order who seemed oblivious to the danger he was in. As a matter of fact, they too attacked him publicly and also demanded apologies and affirmative statements from him that 6 million Jews died in gas chambers, Oh, if only we could see such demands of compliance from Rome! In this second persecution of Bishop Williamson, Bishop Fellay tells him in this letter that he does not wish this time for Bishop Williamson to speak, but to be silent. On what subject you ask. Bishop Fellay divulges that it is on the subject of the Catholic faith. In other words, this time, he does not wish B. Williamson to make statements, but to stop making statements. And if Bishop Williamson were to follow to the letter the demands made of him by his superiors in order to save himself from ouster, then he should affirmatively speak of the 6 million Jews who died in gas chambers, and stop speaking about the Catholic faith. Is this now the way to salvation?

Mr. McFarland, I note that you have failed to face the essence of my response to you: the faith is being revised in reference to the Holocaust. I've provided the evidence of the rabbis saying that they intend for the alleged gas chambers to replace the Cross of Christ. I've shown evidence of JPII saying of Aushwitz, "I kneel at this Golgotha of the modern world." There are photos of him actually kneeling at the "death wall" at Auschwitz which BXVI later bowed to. I've shown evidence of a Vatican II peritus plainly saying that "The Holocaust" has triggered a new religious dispensation in which the Gospel must be reinterpreted in accordance with "The Holocaust."

Bp. Williamson, at least, has cast doubt on this idolatrous "Holocaust" contrivance. "Small beer," you say? Please point me to any other Catholic bishop who has dared to do so much or to say what was published in EC 222 so that I may support him also. I have not found any other such bishop. How tragic this is! How tragic that the only bishop to refuse to bend the knee to the Baal of our time is mocked and persecuted by his own. But isn't that always the case ...

Either "The Holocaust" gets revised in accordance with the truth or our religion will continue to be revised according "The Holocaust." Wake up and face what is happening. "The Holocaust" is now being taught in certain SSPX schools. It will be taught in all SSPX schools if there is no protest.

I haven't read your post on PJP II and Auschwitz and the rest. I will, and will give you any thoughts I think worth passing along.

I doubt, however, that I'll much more to say than that the "teaching" is blasphemy and abomination.

What divides us is the fact that you seem to think that it is THE abomination of the conciliar "magisterium," while I think that it is one abomination among many.

Just to give what I myself consider the most outrageous: in Redemptor hominis, PJP II's first encylical and the first of the infamous trinitarian encyclicals, for all practical purposes he teaches universal salvation in which faith plays absolutely no role.

P.S. Let me add a minor correction regarding Bishop Williamson. My remarks about the level of Bishop Williamson's Holocaust learning at the time of the big blowup were of course not based on the fateful interview, which did not get into such matters, but on remarks that he made in a talk that he gave at my parish in Northern Virginia later in November 2008. In making a few remarks about the Holocaust, his chief authority was Fred Leuchter. My guess is that he was first exposed to revisionism by Doug Chrystie, the Canadian traditional Catholic lawyer who defended Ernst Zuendel, and that he didn't have much exposure to the state of the art after the late 80's.

What drove it was the well-justified fear that the Society might be forbidden to operate schools, or even run out of Germany, as a result of the whole business.

My hypothesis is that Bishop Fellay and those around him were clearly in panic mode, and Herr Krah was able to sell them on the course of action that they then set out upon. Of course, it did not help that no hint of revisionism seems to have reached the people involved.

I am certainly not about to defend that course of action, and I believe that the scuttling to der Spiegel, a sworn enemy of the Church, is fairly described as disgraceful. But given the gravity of the situation, I myself am not inclined to cast the first stone.

McFarland deserves credit for writing under his own name and taking a lot of hits. He is brave and responsible. But I disagree with him. It’s easy to call Williamson’s e-mail column small beer when he writes about music and poetry instead of the Jews or the scope of the holocaust.

McFarland forgets that Williamson keeps his column going as his lifeline to the outside world. He's still in legal trouble for denying the holocaust. He can’t depend on the attorneys Fellay has given him (they were terrible). Fellay and his network call Williamson a hand grenade and uranium. I doubt they would care if he was extradited to Germany and imprisoned or silenced forever by the Vatican.

Look at how Fellay treated Fr. Abrahamowicz - he was homeless in no time.

Williamson needs his comments column to keep himself free of the German jail and Fellay’s spider web. He stays in touch with people around the world who care about his human rights.The other three bishops don’t have much love for the rights of an Anglo-Saxon.

Mr. McFarland, here's why "The Holocaust" isn't just one of many abominations, and it's not merely an abomination, it's an inversion and counterfeit replacement for the central event of Christianity.

The Pope has allowed all manner of doubts of post-conciliar teaching. There is even serious talk that he will grant 'full communion' to the SSPX while allowing them to continue their doubts and debates on theological matters such as you describe. However, they will tolerate no doubt of "The Holocaust."

The Pope has said that Bp. Williamson's 'full communion' would be contingent upon him apologizing for and repudiating his doubts regarding "The Holocaust." Archbishop Marx proclaimed, "Every denial of 'The Holocaust' must be punished harshly." He was soon after raised to Cardinal. There are countless other such examples of how the Catholic Church is now the enforcer of "Holocaust" dogma even while it disregards and destroys Catholic dogma.

It's plainly evident that "The Holocaust" is of a higher order to post-conciliar authorities than even their own teachings.

As someone commented at the JPII thread regarding Cardinal Marx's quote and other similar ones: "When you read these quotes you cannot help but marvel. In the last nearly 100 years, you have not seen any authoritarian statements issued from the self-described "pastoral" Rome. The old anathema was rendered defunct ......until now."

And for what purpose? To prop up a counterfeit of the central event of Christianity.

McFarland brave? What is so brave about a man who wishes to distance himself from an issue, an issue that shows itself in countless ways to be a replacement for the True Sacrifice. "Holocaust" is a sacrifice to God, and it is held to be inviolate by Ratzinger, and to turn a blind's eye to what it represents and what it is meant to replace evinces nothing better than someone trying to distance himself from the very thing that is going to get hiim in a heap of trouble in this world. Brave? It shows the very opposite.

I experienced first hand the power of the Holocaust taboo some years ago.

My son was an 8th grader at a Catholic school when he came homeand asked me for field trip money, $50. $50? Yes, $15 for the bus, $20 for lunch and a $15.fee to enter the...Holocaust museum.

I told him he would be allowed to take that day off and proceeded to call ten other parents to explain why this was a bad idea and my son would not be going. They all agreed with me on the phone.

The principal was horrified at my actions and offered to pay the $50 fee of those ten students. Seven parents accepted.

It was a 14 hour day for these students. The bus ride was 3 hours one way. A bus that had no bathroom! My son told me his friends told him it was a horrible day.

Many of the children had taken sodas or water on the bus and after 40 minutes needed to use a restroom. The driver said there would be one stop at the 90 minute mark!

After a two hour tour, the children watched a movie on the 4th floor, and were given a lecture by one of the professional promoters.

When the principal and the 8th grade teacher went to join the class in the theatre,the power in the elevator went out. They were stranded in an elevator with no lights for more than one hour.

Upon returning to the classroom at 9pm, the students were told they were forbidden to tell the 4 students who did not go,any detail of the trip.

As punishment for not going on this field trip, my son had to write a 5 paragraph paper on tolerance and diversity. I helped him write it. The theme of the paper was diversity and tolerance are not Catholic virtues nor Catholic teachings!

These impressionable kids were taught the Catholic church and Pope Pius XII knew about the gas chambers but did nothing to stop it.

Several parents refused to speak to me after this field trip. And I mean not one word.

I later learned a bit more about the background of these two teachers at my sons school. The principal had been a nun, left the order, got married, divorced and remarried. She kept a "crucifix" of Jesus on her deak that showed a peaceful Jesus extending his arms. No joke.

The 8th grade teacher had also been a nun. She was single. Sort of... One of the parents discovered she was living with another woman her age (60-65) and asked her outright if she was a practicing lesbian. The teacher admitted it. The parent said she would out her if she did not retire. She retired.

It is clear that the posting of this "accidental" letter has wrought good, opened a window to let some fresh air blow away the stench of fratricide, clericalism, and a denial of the Faith most foul.

The fratricidal remarks and treatment of Bp. Williamson are a stain on the Society's leadership. Suffice it to be known that Bp. Williamson preaches "instantly in and out of season," the commission given to the Church.

The leadership's reprehensible, cowering fear of the Jews led to concealment of authentic Catholic doctrine, a virtual denial of the Faith, a new lying "dogma," that has advanced the synagogue of Satan's replacement of the Crucifixion with their WhollyHoax.

Contradicting St. Paul, the infallible word of that greatest convert from Pharisaism, the flagship publication of the Society (in 'Anglo-Saxon circles' anyway) has contumaciously canonized "The Saint of the Sanhedrin" (Angelus, December 2010).

A commanding Zionist has been taken into the Society's inner circle and now the stench of usury fills our nostrils.

Heliocentrism has entered the Society's schools. Is evolution next?

No matter who has a red hat, the usurious mortgages on the properties, or thirty pieces of silver, WE (and I mean emphatically to include Bp. Williamson) HAVE THE FAITH. Our children may be expelled from the Society's schools and we may be assisting Mass on our knees in the desert, but WE HAVE THE FAITH.

The Son of man, when he cometh, shall he find, think you, faith and decency... or proud Pharisees... in Menzingen?

Bishop Williamson has got himself in considerable trouble for not keeping silent.

If he had kept silent, none of the events of 2009 and thereafter would have happened when they happened.

His continued breaking of silence has also got him even more in trouble with his superior.

So I don't quite understand why his breaking silence is protective. I guess you mean that since people know of his views, it is more "politically" difficult to dismiss him.

That may be the point of the cabal that it seems that he has (electronically, at any rate) gathered around himself. But meanwhile on EC he has continued to nip at Bishop Fellay's heels. If this is protective, it is protective in a rather cynical way. He is throwing red meat to his followers by undercutting the SSPX. The most likely result of continuing in this track is not that he will be protected, but that Bishop Fellay's patience will be exhausted, and he will be sacked.

Meanwhile, he is certainly not gaining protection from the forces of whom Abe Foxman is the servant and the symbol. A blog visited by a few thousand people is not going to help him much if and when they come for him as they came for Zuendel and Rudolf.

And now he has tweaked their noses with his recent EC on the theology of the Jews. Taken in the abstract, his remarks are undoubtedly true. But if this time the Jewish counterattack is more than the usual denunciations, the SSPX may find itself fighting on most unfavorable ground, as it did after the famed interview, and now on an undoubted matter of religion.

I don't really understand what Bishop Williamson is up to here, but it's hard to think of it as anything protective of him -- and much less as anything good.

The Holocaust ideology is not a substitute for Christianity. Those of you who say so are just trying to find the most forceful way to express their opposition, and unfortunately have picked a turn of phrase that is just not true.

It is of course true that there are Jews that would like to use the Holocaust as a tool to destroy Christianity, and are working away at it. But that is not the same thing.

At bottom the Holocaust ideology is the talking points of remarkably successful campaign to be in a position, when and as useful, to treat Jews individually and collectively as eternal victims and martyrs, and their critics as moral lepers. It's quite an accomplishment even for a race famous for its gift for mass marketing, but it's not a religion.

Rome goes along with it primarily because of fear. I don't have a very high opinion of the U.S. hierarchy, but I can't credit that they really believe all that stuff they say, any more than any other politicians. I am also not alone in suspecting that serious Jewish money is helping to keep more than one U.S. diocese afloat; and that the donors get something in return.

Or course, the same can be said of all of the Church's capitulations and compromises over the last generation -- or, for that matter, over the last two millennia. Those in authority are scared and/or bribed into betraying their trust.

It's the same pattern, whether the bullies and bagmen are circumcised or uncircumcised.

I presented evidence that one of Pope John Paul II's very first papal acts in 1979 was to go to Auschwitz, piously kneel at the "Death wall" and then offer a N.O. Mass on site during which he reverently echoed Rabbi Maybaum's proclamation saying "I kneel at this Golgotha of the modern world."

You're simply ignoring this and dismissing the plain implications of it saying "Holocaust ideology is not a substitute for Christianity."

Well I'm glad you recognize the truth of the matter, but that does nothing to stop those who are successfully replacing Christianity with this counterfeit.

Yours is a sophistic way of getting out of your Christian responsibility to oppose error and attacks against the faith. And your model is Bp. Fellay and his sophistic dispensation from Christian duty in his claim that we shouldn't speak on "historical matters." This is akin to saying that Arianism shouldn't have been opposed because it's a matter of math.

It's a clear and present savage attack on the faith at its very heart. Salvation comes via the Cross. The gas chambers bring us enslavement. Future generations would rightly curse those who shirked their responsibility at this late hour.

The god of Judaism is the Father of Lies. It has well been said with no small degree of truth that, "Like Mohammedanism and the Protestant sects it promoted among Christians, Judaism has never been a religion, but an apostasy. Even in Old Testament days it existed as a heresy within Israel. Fountainhead of Christian heresies, it was already in place in our Lord's day and was condemned by Him."

Hopefully, Bp. Williamson will speak the truth along these lines. He has certainly got the ball rolling in the right direction with his Eleison Comment #222 as in, for example, this excerpt from same: " But only the Jews (leaders and people) were the prime agents of the deicide because it is obvious from the Gospels that the Gentile most involved, Pontius Pilate, would never have condemned Jesus to death had not the Jewish leaders roused the Jewish people to clamour for his crucifixion (Mt. XXVII, 20)."

Your evidence does not have the implications that you attribute to it.

All the things you cite from Jews are cynical sloganeering, like the term "Holocaust" itself. Rabbi Maybaum's interest is in advancing the cause of the Jews as he understands it, not in stealing Our Lord's thunder.

As you no doubt have noticed, Judaism is not a very religious religion. There are probably not a few Jews who haven't believed in God in four generations, and nonetheless are undoubtedly Jews.

All of the falling in by Catholics with the sloganeering is the result of some combination of successful bullying and successful bribery. Rome's chief interest is in going along to get along, and getting crosswise with organized Jewry is very much at odds with that business plan.

Objectively speaking, that at bottom is all that Rome "believes" in. That at bottom is all that Vatican II is about. If Alexander VI had thought that traducing the doctrine of the Church was in his interest, and had thought that he could away with it, we would have had the equivalent of Vatican II before 1500.

To be sure, I very much doubt that the Pope and the rest of the hierarchy is subjectively that cynical. But the first step in their fooling the faithful is fooling themselves.

What you are attacking is a matter of politics, not religion. Unless and until you recognize that, you're going to make a hash of both religion and politics.

Because Bishop Fellayis one of the millions of people who take the Holocaust for granted, and is disinclined to work up as much indignation over Jewish machinations as you deem appropriate, you seem prepared to believe almost anything about him, as long as it puts him in a bad enough light.

Other than not calling him "Bernie," you seem to stand shoulder to shoulder with all the unregenerate Fellay haters, and demonstrate about the same degree of rationality as they.

Let me put it to you this way. Bishop Fellay may end by selling out the cause of Christ; but if so, nothing that you have adduced shows very convincing evidence that the sell-out is in the offing. He is a man with greater responsibilities than pseudonymous blogging, and I'm more than a little scandalized that you don't seem to have the slightest appreciation of that.

"...does not want to steal Our Lord's thunder"??? Mr. MacFarland, have you read the Talmud, let alone the daily papers?

Mr. Pinay, I've just signed on and have found the comments section both inspiring and pathetic. Thank you for a well-balanced monitoring job.

If History has nothing to do with Religion then why don't we all (Catholics, Protestants, Jews, etc...) just get along and live in peace. You know, let by-gones be by-gones. Give me a break! La Vallette, Don Juan and Cathelineau would virtually slap us in the face for such spineless rhetoric. Where are the men, the heroes of today's Catholic front?

If the heads of the SSPX are spotless in this matter, let them come forward, like men, and calm the troubled seas that have been caused by their lack of transparency. Is that too simplistic a view?

Stan J. Benson

PS - Mr. James Phillips: have you received any backlash for what you have said?

Mr. McFarland: I am a real poster on this blog. It is much easier for me to comment like this instead of setting up an account etc. I am real and hail from the USA

No one hates Bishop Fellay. He is in great error if he signs Vatican document. We are concerned about his soul and in the long run, ours too.

If he signs it, get ready for liturgical dancing*LOL* during mass.*LOL*

SSPX is one of the biggest traditional Catholic organizations in the world. They want to disband it because it is growing and poses a threat to their personal agendas.Please note: that rhe last several popes were big promoters and supporters of Vatican II.

And of course, we pray for the conversion of the Pope...but we cannot go along with heresy and apostacy.

I note that many of those crying attaboy to BW confine their own Speaking Out to anonymous or pseudonymous big talk on obscure blogs.

----

Mr. McFarland, you don't know what I or any other person commenting anonymously does in his own name. If you have any long term exposure to the traditionalist world you know there's as much to fear from "our own" as there is from "our enemies." You know how easily a message can be destroyed by attacking its messenger and how commonplace that disreputable tactic is.

Further, your suggestion that the SSPX international corporation is "in the catacombs" is ridiculous in the extreme. Fellay and his cronies are living like 15th century nobility. There's no temporal sacrifices being made by them, only sacrifices of the truth to accommodate the world's lies, not unlike your apologetics on their behalf.

Moreover, you claim there's virtue in hiding in catacombs in the same breath that you chastise anonymous bloggers.

Why don't you take some time to sort your thoughts out. Your confusion reflects the misdirection of the Rorate Caeli crowd you've associated with.

Maurice said..." So, we have a choice, either we uncover the facts about WWII and revise the propaganda that has been shoved down our throats for 60 years to conform with the truth, or our religion will continue to be revised according to that propaganda.

Does this help you to understand why revisionism is important to some of us Catholics? October 18, 2011 11:52 AM "

Maurice, when I read your comment ( excerpt included for reference ).. I remember the blog you posted that sent a feeling of sheer terror through my being. The blog was titled " I want to attack their souls. " It woke me up..Deo Gratias! Jesse Dahl JMJ

I read the parable of the evil husbandmen rather differently from you.

The Greek for husbandman is georgos -- earthworker. They don't want the father's house, or the son's sonship; they want THE LAND. Left to his own devices, as Caiphas prophesies, the Son will deprive them of their place and their nation.

The Foxmans of the world don't want heaven; they want the world. The craziest of them picture themselves as either the David or the Joseph of the New World Order: the king, or the smart Jewish guy running the show for the king.

Read or reread Frs. Crowdy and Novak's famous piece in the 1997 Angelus. The great Foxmanite weapon is materialism. We are only strong when we are not imitation Foxmanites. Imitation Foxmanites are no match for the genuine article.

Your citations don't refute my point; they help prove it. At bottom, God is, in the Foxmanites' view, their invention or their conquest; and you can't very well take your own invention or your slave seriously beyond its use for the purposes for which you invented or conquered it. The pretense of religion is just another way of putting the shuck to the rubes.

When Jesus speaks against money, they laugh at him.

The young Karl Marx famously described gold as "Israel's jealous God."

It's God against Mammon -- and sex and power that money can buy.

But not just in the battle against the Foxmanites.

It's God against Mammon -- the spirit against the flesh -- in all the battles of the Church Militant.

History (that is, the deeds of men in time) have to do with religion to the extent that men believe what God has revealed, and act accordingly.

Since many are called and few are chosen, and few take the narrow path that leads to life, and only some of the sower's seed bears fruit, history doesn't have very much to do with religion. There have been, and there will be, no golden ages on this side of the Jordan.

Mr. McFarland, you argued that the rabbis aren't trying to "steal God's thunder." They've been attempting to overthrow God and take His place as long as they've existed. I've given evidence from the rabbinic canon that they claim they beat God in debate and that God learns from them. If this isn't usurping the place of God, nothing is.

These same people have concocted a replacement for Calvary and have made great progress towards installing it whether you acknowledge it or not.

Further, it is a grave misunderstanding to claim that Judaism is solely materialistic. They do shut up the kingdom of God as Jesus Himself said. They do attack souls as Rabbi Abraham Heschel said.

Moreover, the "vineyard" in the parable cited is not merely "the land." Jesus concluded saying, "Therefore I say to you, that the kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and shall be given to a nation yielding the fruits thereof."

This isn't a place for you to endlessly split hairs and spin off into a million different directions in an attempt to "win" a war. There are many places that traditionalists congregate for that kind of thing. If you must persist please do so elsewhere.

Mr. McFarland,Indeed, “we have no lasting city here.” I do not think I implied that, but certainly stand corrected if I did.Aside from that, I am having a hard time following your logic: “Many are called, but few…” ergo, “history doesn’t have very much to do with religion.” Sir, the deeds of men (History) are not going to help us memorize our Catechism, or the Ten Commandments (the tenets of our Faith), but they will certainly affect the way (to a certain extent) in which we practice these tenets of our Holy Faith. I hope that I am not starting to split hairs as well, but I do think that BW has simply tried to warn us – make us more aware – of what has happened in the past and how it is similar to what we are going through now. Perhaps we can avoid mistakes made in the past? He is NOT replacing meditation and prayer with History 101. Our spirituality “the work of God” is on a different plane than the “works of men”, but one must order his natural life, in addition to his spiritual life. We must work to help people convert “on this side of Jordan” in order that we can all be together on the other side of Jordan. The study of History aids us immensely in this work. I think that is what BW is saying, has said, and please God, will continue to say.

It's important that Maurice Pinay published this letter, if not for anything else, than to expose Bishop Fellay's two-faceness. He announces to his parisioners that he is not signing a preamble....fighting for the Catholic faith!!! Behind everyone's back is he doing the bidding of the Jews and ousting the most Catholic bishop they have. It was good to have this double-dealing exposed.

No doubt, the SSPX Superiors meeting at Albano were no doubt taken aback to discover that Bp Williamson was not there. It seems that Bp Fellay tried to minimize damage by saying that a second, and more pertinent, letter had been written by him to Bp.Williamson ( ...but he obviously had not sent it!!!).There is disgust across the Society at this treatment of Bp Williamson. Fellay seems to be lying low for the moment, but this does not mean that he is going to slow down on his sell-out.c

My son, a SSPX priest, showed me this site with much concern over private matters made public.I am a mother who has always stood up to defend privacy with some success, until the internet appeared.Now it has gone, along with truth, as everyone who is anybody and nobody feels they have the right to express and pulish anything they like.I know why Our Lady appeared to 3 small children at Fatima to tell the world that the penance that God requires of us is to do our daily duty. People who spend hours on blogs and posting comments obviously do not have enough work to do. Conspiracy theorists are the worse and do the Church no favours.We must do as Our Lady asked as this terrible punishment will continue until the Pope consecrates Russia to Her Immaculate Heart.To Bishop Williamson I say ,defend your privacy and abandon the internet as a sacrifice to offer Our Lord. Prayer works miracles.

My son, a SSPX priest, showed me this site with much concern over private matters made public.

----

If your son passed the information along to others, he's an accessory to the horrible crimes you accuse me of.

For people like yourself to come here indicates to me that Bp. Fellay's suspicious and secretive behavior has invited suspicion.

Regarding the criticism of blogs and the internet, as long as 'the experts' fail in their duty to keep the people educated on pertinent information in a truthful, unbiased manner, the responsibility and attention will be taken up by others.

Our Lord prayed AND He severely chastised corrupt leaders as did the Apostles and many of our greatest saints. In our time Pharisaic corruption is worse than the time when Christ walked the earth. This is not Medieval Catholic Europe. Prayer alone is not enough.

"...My son, a SSPX priest, showed me this site with much concern over private matters made public.I am a mother who has always stood up to defend privacy with some success, until the internet appeared..."

Congratulations for having a son that is a Priest.

SSPX Whitened Sepulchers conduct clandestine Criminal Background checks on people without their knowledge or permission, publicly calumny people that refuse to bow before them, and accuse without giving the accused a chance to defend themselves.

One can be sure Satan has his eye on the SSPX. Perhaps Bishop Williamson is his port of entry? In any case, His Grace, alas, is threatening the stability and usefulness of the Society. Msgr. Lefebvre must be rolling over in his grave.

My following comment is provided in a proper Catholic context. The concept of blogs in the abstract is neutral. The actual use of or application of same can be good or evil.

In some uses or applications just as in some questions of moral theology there can sometimes be a morally permissible leeway of opinion granted to men of good will. I strongly suspect that the privacy/disclosure issue as seen and understood in both the narrow and broader circumstances surrounding it in the matter herein is one such use/application of a blog. In this regard I would submit that any rash "winner takes all" condemnations thrown by either side against the other can easily tend to be counterproductive to the carrying on of any reasonable and thoughtful discussion. That said, strong and even quite animated defenses of one's positon on the privacy/disclosure matter should be encouraged as a means of greater understanding in these very critical times of a Church suffering such a prolonged crisis as it obviously is.

Let us not forget that another "Anglo-Saxon", Fr Peter Scott, was rumored to have been shunted out from Australia because of his using the Australia seminary newsletter to offer strident criticism of the Novus Ordo Church.

Thank you for posting Bishop Fellay's letter on your website as a form of intervention. I am writing to you from Asia and so as a new expat, I have been able to travel to different SSPX Mass Centers in Asia. I have long been praying about what to do with the SSPX situation here. I find that Bp. Fellay who has long kept the Asian district superior in place for far too long closes his eyes to many many abuses within the SSPX or he has set up the system that way & unchecked. He has wasted so much time caught up in Rome's net instead of focusing on his REAL JOB: being a shepherd to the souls entrusted to him. Recently he has visited the Philippines and last year his assistant visited Asia. They visit but overlook the pathetic situation of MOST of the Mass centers & do NOTHING to make the missions successful apostolates. The Mormons & Protestant sects put the SSPX to shame in this part of the world!!! Visit Asia & you'll see! I am so SICK of poor Asian countries being used by the SSPX as charity cases or as a basket case as a whole. We DON'T need medical missions!!! We need Catechism books, Catholic libraries, Catechetical centers & catechists, and more experienced SSPX priests because Asians are hungry for the TRUE FAITH. We have more than enough medical clinics around for vaccinations & medical care (btw the SSPX medical mission is only once a year in the Philippines & they haven't converted anyone!). When we are sent a good SSPX priest who sees the tragedy & tries to improve it, he is transferred as soon as the district superior senses the improvements & that he cannot make him a yes-man. Hmmmm sounds like the superior general himself huh!

So here we have a Traditional Catholic Bishop shoved in a hole in England just because he dares question established Zionist "facts". When I went to public high school in Silicon Valley in the states, I couldn't believe I was forced to watch 2 weeks worth of Holocaust movies for U.S. history class!!! Doesn't that tell you anything??? Bishop Williamson should be allowed to travel & resume his duties as a Catholic Bishop. Preaching is a duty! Before his exile, he actually told my husband that we were better off moving back to Asia because of what was going to happen to the U.S. For that advice alone I am truly grateful! I know that if he traveled here & saw what was going on he would say something & do something about it.

No! Look at all this chaos & suffering because the Superior General has been in power far too long!!!

When will SSPX-attending Catholics start thinking for themselves and hold those in authority accountable when they are wrong and abusive??? I've been thrown out of many forums for daring to question the actions of certain priests or a certain district superior. I've personally experienced that you will get their (SSPX) ear if you write a big check but if you're going to question & investigate their operations, you will simply be shut down. So now I'm smarter about donations. I am not discounting the hardworking SSPX priests but I believe the SSPX needs major reform from within and it should start from the top down. If it takes a letter to jump start change or at least a wake up call, so be it!

Thank you very much BV for posting your letter on the dire situation in SSPX Asia. and thank you Maurice Pinay for publishing it. Yes, once the gimmicks and cheap publicity are removed, the situation is dire.If some of the Asian priests are to believed, Menzingen uses this district as a dumping ground for unwanted priests. The District Superior seems to have job for life because he willingly accepts whoever he is sent. Its about time that both he and Fellay resign.

After having read the letter of Bishop Williamson to the author of this weblog, the letter of Bishop Fellay to Bishop Williamson, and the many comments , right down to the bitter end, i am shocked by the greatlack of christian faith and charity amongst the clergy and faithful attached to the SSPX, for which i have always felt much sympathy since the very beginning of the SSPX. I once met Archbishop Lefebvre and still revere him as a Saint. But to be honest, having read all the comments here, I now also hope that the SSPX never reenters Communion with the Cathoilc Church. For we have enough problems already, without the addition of the hatred, infighting, backstabbing and delusional thinking evident here.

B.V., I hope you are aware that "interdicts" against faithful are not unknown in the Asia District. Since you seem to be identifiable don't be surprised if one is slapped on you. If such is the case please do not let you and yours be without the sacraments. You may wish to contact Fr Joven Soliman:

In response to "For the past 10 years Bp. Fellay has been playing games with us:....."

The letter from Bishop Fellay to Bishop Williams and game playing is all typical novus ordo tactics.

When I was in novus ordo, they had workbooks on had to deal with problem people like myself who protested the church closings. They held sessions for novus priests which included brainwashing with threats or/and rewards...Also, novus ordo place church closings and hollywood lifestyles as a priority over Christ and the Catholic faith.

10 years is too long.

The SSPX already is planning for World youth Day in Rio 2012 instead preparing for advent....

How can the novus ordo have ecumenical meetings including the ASsisi III when the majority of novus ordo Catholics, including clergy, don't even know their own faith? Many novus ordo catholics are masons too...Novus ordo is about serving personal gains instead of God.

SSPX Rosary Rallie are not enough. In the year 1274 evil infiltrated the Catholic Church and the world. Pope Gregory X and the bishops chose promoting Holy Name of Jesus to be the easiest and effective. The Catholic Church was restored by the Holy Name of Jesus. Jesus, Jesus, Jesus. Christ is King!

"In the Name of Jesus every knee shall bend in Heaven, on Earth and in Hell."

Noticed that USA SSPX has made frantic changes and updates to their website. It seems as if they are trying to cover up and discredit us which is also typical novus ordo.

Is the SSPX Pro-life? Where is planned pilgrimmage for annual March for Life in Washington, D.C. on January 23, 2012 to prevent abortions of babies worldwide?

Youth Pilgrimmage to Rio now to Rome..what's the difference? It mainly for the rich anyway...

These are hard economic times all over the world and most people cannot afford luxury trips to Rome or Rio. Many people are losing their jobs or businesses, and their homes. Many hardworking people are having a hard time putting food on the table. Also, many people are suffering because of earthquakes, hurricanes, wild fires, etc.

SSPX USA should plan to visit pre-vatican II saints and shrines in pHiladelphia and New Jersey where the first American Catholics settle and were persecuted. In New Jersey, and other states of 13 original colonies catholicism was illegal. SSPX USA should visit Shrine of Saint John Neumann, bishop of philadelpia, Saint MOther Katherine Drexel mission center, Shrine of the Miraculous Medal in Philadelphia instead of trips to Rome, Rio or even shrine even Missouri...these are all real shrines and saints.. all pre-vatican II. You can even vist the Irish famine monument and even the liberty bell.

I wonder if one of those "Anglo-Saxon circles" that Fellay talks about was the Australia District, which had New Zealand removed from it and placed in the Asia District run by one of his toadies, who is helped in maintaining his perpetual power by a small, rich, but fawning group of Chinese in Singapore.

I originally posted a comment when you first printed this letter that I thought you were wrong for doing so.

I would like to retract that former comment.

It seemed to me perhaps unethical but considering everythng that has happened over the last three years with Fellay and considering that he answers to no one for the wicked that he has done to his brother bishop not to mention untold laity and some priests, I understand why you did it.

Fellay is accountable to no one and much of his dirty deeds go unchecked.

He fools many with his charismatic charm, and many others willfully choose to be decieved so it seems, because the truth about him is too much for some to handle.

It is safer for them to live in a land of makebelieve with regard to the true nature and character of Fellay. Not to mention, its easier too.

Many feel like things are out of control in the world and most especially in the Church and the only semblence of normalcy or order amidst the chaos has been the SSPX and its leadership. At least before the cozy up with Rome began in 2008(and behind closed doors even before 2008)

So I venture to state that a great majority would rather look the other way, or find excuses for all the crooked and wicked words and actions that have come from Fellay over the last three years particularly, because if they accept the truth about this man, that he is in fact a modernist who employs modernist tactics and has no problem whatsoever crucifying those who oppose him, then much of their own lives may feel to them a bit more "out of control" as well.

Following some adverse comments on the Maurice Pinay Blogspot on the running of SSPX-Asia District, the District Superior (For Life) has summoned the four priors of that district to a meeting in Manila to chalk out a strategy of damage-control and cover up. The meeting goes on at this very moment. Watch out for the next edition of that district's glossy newsletter!

Bishop Fellay is not the Pope yet he seems to act in a manner that no Pope in recent times would have dared. He seems fully in touch with what he believe to be his powers yet he gives the impression of having lost touch with charity and humility. His treatment of and attitude toward Bishop Williamson appear scandalous. His manner of 'ruling' the SSPX is plainly autocratic and arguably paranoid. He has surrounded himself with clerical yes-men and his answer to criticism or even simple questioning is to excommunicate, to cast out and to silence every interlocutor who does not kow-tow to him, to his coterie and to his vision of how he wants the SSPX to be. He gives every impression of having abandoned the ethos of the SSPX, as founded by Archbishop Lefebvre and seems close to apostasy from the Christian religion and thus from the CATHOLIC FAITH. I have little real doubt that had Archbishop Lefebvre known the pass to which Bishop Fellay would lead the SSPX and mislead the Faithful he would never have ordained him to the Priesthood, in the first place.

Perhaps it is time for God to directly intervene in order to save His Church as the SSPX gets sucked into the vacuum or at least part of it. Remember the warnings of our Lady. Over and over again she has warned of an impending chastisement and has gone so far as to say Rome would lose the faith and become the seat of the anti christ. With that in mind, Assisi III, the visit to Martin Luther's "monastery" where the faith was disgraced not too long ago and so many other abominations what fruit can come of this "union" with Rome which itself has lost its way and cut itself from union with the True Faith?

I am not particularly a Christian But over the past 3 years I have taken an interest in Judaism and so-called Jews. The more I learn the more I realise the truth in Christ's words, "Ye are of your father, the Devil..."The Bolshevik Jews "holocausted" 66million white Russian Christians in the Soviet Union so estimates Solzenitzin, by torture, targeted starvation, butchery and one way tickets to Gulags. The Talmudic agenda is to annihilate Christianity.So what is the Catholic Church doing speaking to Jews AT ALL ? It sickens me to see the Pope genuflecting and kowtowing to the Jews at Auschwitz and at the Wailing Wall.

Anon @ October 14, 2011 2:32 PM "Krah, Menzingen's lawyer introduced to the inner circles of SSPX by Fr. Pfluger, is a conduit between Menzingen and the world of International Finance, Freemasonry and Judaism."Odds 10 to 1 You are right !

kiwiinamerica October 14, 2011 3:54 PM "No, Williamson is not a Nazi. He's a "Holocaust denier" which makes him a "Nazi enabler" which is almost as bad."A load of meaningless ad hominems. Here is one for you. "You're an idiot."Holocaust deniers say:-1. NO Jew was gassed. Look up the FORENSIC Leuchter Report.2. No order from Hitler to exterminate the Jews. The onus of proof here is on the JEWS. If you make such a claim you have to produce the evidence, and you can't !3. No 6,000,000 or anywhere close.Churchill's 5 volume and over 3000 pages "History of the Second World War" does not mention the "Holocaust"......Odd !

Maurice Pinay October 19th 1200pm "The Pope has said that Bp. Williamson's 'full communion' would be contingent upon him apologizing for and repudiating his doubts regarding "The Holocaust." Archbishop Marx proclaimed, "Every denial of 'The Holocaust' must be punished harshly." He was soon after raised to Cardinal. There are countless other such examples of how the Catholic Church is now the enforcer of "Holocaust" dogma even while it disregards and destroys Catholic dogma."Excuse me Maurice while I throw up all over the carpet ! "Marx" ??!! Now where have I heard that name ?

Bishop Williamson is a beacon of light in the now Talmudic Church of Rome. He abides in the truth and is therefore a true Bishop of Christ.

Fellay's letter reveals his stark arrogance and utter hubris.The letter addresses an issue which, by its nature is of public interest and should never be concealed, not regarded as private.Pinay's publication of the letter services the cause of open debate and truth.I rather stand by the side of truth than by the side of social correctness.Be discrete on private matters, not on public issues, which concern people interested and affected by such issues.